The "bad teacher" bogeyman and its consequences

[haymarket]

The largest and most thorough study of charter schools (they looked at 70% of all charter schools students) came up with results that contradict the limited Gates study about charter schools

http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIPLE_CHOICE_EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.pdf



CREDO

Thanks for that information. The sad reality is that far too many people who simply hate public schools and unions cherry pick data from cherry picked charter schools for very partisan purposes. And then they compare that to selected public school on the opposite end of the spectrum while ignoring the public schools which are doing a fine job. Its a perfect case of intellectual fraud.

 

[sangha]

Thanks for that information. The sad reality is that far too many people who simply hate public schools and unions cherry pick data from cherry picked charter schools for very partisan purposes. And then they compare that to selected public school on the opposite end of the spectrum while ignoring the public schools which are doing a fine job. Its a perfect case of intellectual fraud.

If you re-read the link to the Gates reports, you'll see that they limited the types of charter schools they looked at. Hmmmm

 

[Phys251]

Good finds, sangha and haymarket.

I'm still waiting to hear how much classroom experience Mr. Gates has.

 

[Boo Radley]

You aren't reasoning this out correctly.
The government run public education system in the U.S. cannot, and does not:
1. pick students (in the global sense)
2. pick parents.

Yet both those groups play a role in education. An important role. More important than schools or teachers.

So why are you pointing the finger outside the system? It should be no surprise that a monolithic government-run insitution doesn't perform.

Because they paly a role. A student is not an empty vessel. A student brings with him or her all the problems, desires, anger, and problems they have. Each is different. Parents can help or hinder. And many hinder. They play a role. You cannot escape that.

Even more interesting to me is that you (and others) appear to be missing what "it's teachers dummy" actually implies.
In the current system, teachers being the biggest factor in education it does NOT necessarily imply that it's:
1. the direct fault/root cause, of teachers
2. that it's something teachers have to solve on their own
3. that it's not about replacing teachers primarily.

Biggest factor IN THE CLASSROOM. Don't forget that little notation.

What it does imply that good teachers, make a huge difference in education(!) Are you opposed to that conclusion?
It's about finding out why good teachers are good, and fostering a systemt that identifies this on an ongoing basis, and attemps to train and measure this.

Of course they do. But that is not what is at dispute. The dispute is in 1) the claim there are a lot of bad teachers and 2) that teachers are responsible for all outcomes. Neither claim is true.

 

[blackjack50]

Being in a College of Education for a minor...I have taken some classes on education. My thinking on education has been shaped by these classes through a historical aspect, as well as influenced by my own personal experience and drawing knowledge from what other people have spoken about.

Here are some Facts:
1)Given the title of this thread...Bad teachers exist. It is a simple fact that some people are just bad at their job. That is why people get fired (among the 9 million other excuses they will give you why they get fired of course there might be 1 or 2 good excuses because let's face it...nobody wants to admit they suck at their job [just like I don't want to admit I suck at organization or stress management])

2)There is no "big problem" with out education system. That is a fallacy. An utter fabrication of the truth as perpetuated by those who want to push for money in the education budget, people who want something positive to talk about in politics, and suckers who believe that there is one big problem with education. The dirty little secret is that this NATION is HUGE. There are many different schools across this nation, from elementary to high school. To think that ANY school is suffering from identical problems is STUPID and ILLOGICAL. A simple research into some basic educational theory from Horrace Mann to modern educational psychology(which is quite often practiced before it is proven), will tell you that learning can be effected by MANY different things.

3)Given #2...ANY attempt to put ANY form of code on a school from the Federal level of government is ridiculous (except maybe the most rudamentary of things regarding...facilities? maybe some other BASIC standards a school should adhere too that are NOT based on the grades or scores of a student). The reason I say this is because how often have we heard politicians talk about educational policies? Left side and right side of the aisle? How many of them have "improved" our education system? NONE. Why? Because there is still this mass hysteria of how bad schools are.

4)Given #3 that should lead us to understand that SCHOOL standards or goals should be set by the closest possible management. If a school board or principle should be dealing with overall school performance (and even below that teachers ARE responsible for educating students and if certain teachers are not performing well...it falls on the principle (as the BOSS...or LEADER of the school) to deal with the situation). The principle is accountable to the district or whatever. This system would ensure that those most familiar to the problems of a certain region can discuss and deal with it. That is how accountability works. This is NOT the case though. There are all kinds of standards set all the time by state governments, federal governments, and they usually involve spending money or paying money or doing this or doing that....and nothing ever gets done.

And Now...here is what my thoughts have formed as:
1)Private schools perform well for a variety of reasons and cannot be written off. Charter schools cannot either. Some schools WILL perform better. This is because of parent dedication or just generally better educated students. This does not mean that public schools cannot perform well either. They do.

2)Don't talk about raising taxes to improve education. This does one thing...it encourages people to raise taxes on the wealthy districts. While I know that just made several butt cheeks clench when I said don't tax the wealthy, but the fact is that property tax is the number 1 and primary payment method for public schooling. So raising tax on the wealthy district improves pay for WHAT district? THE WEALTHY! You want to improve funding for schools? Change your method of funding. That is why poor schools and rich schools exist.

3)Community involvement of schools is a MUST. That means getting donations and getting people to invest in school. There should be outreach and things like that. Look at the Harlem School Zone. It was founded by 1 wealthy individual and boasts some impressive results.

4)My final thought for the thread before I go to sleep...Community Schools. Same as above. The biggest problem with your local school should be looked at within your community. You want to improve the local schools? Look at the factors at what makes your schools suck. Don't try spouting off why schools suck all over the nation from what only YOU have seen or what YOU are told by government or news people. They won't always apply to schools in your area. Schools in my area were suffering from abject poverty and gang invasion, but have a multi million dollar facility. They still are. Schools in the next county are suffering from crappy facilities...but not the gang invasion.

 

[Mach]

The largest and most thorough study of charter schools (they looked at 70% of all charter schools students) came up with results that contradict the limited Gates study about charter schools

That's incorrect. I don't see that Gates Foundation in what I posted, claimed that:
- The national average of a charter school is better than the national average of public schools

What I quoted from Gates has to do with the studies they funded and analyzed. It's similar to an experimiental drug evaluation.
You go in with variables and control and you see what worked best. In the schools they worked with, charters performed the best. Their conclusion, find out what makes these charters a success, and:
1. Analyze and understand why
2. If feasible, promote wider distribution of such practice

Are you claiming also that this would then be a bad:
1. conclusion
2. goal for education
??

Furthermore, you seem puzzled at why Gates Foundation focused on the schools in their study. What do you think they were doing...setting up testing and funding and evaluation of say, 50 schools, and then ignoring those schools in their analysis?!?

Let's see what's on their foundation site regarding charters, just for completeness:
Charter Schools and Networks | Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Goal #1: Increase the number of students served by high-performing charters by:
Goal #2: Enhance the degree to which successful charter schools influence the broader system by:

Of course, their goals are very specific when it comes to charters, they correctly focus only on the high performing ones. Are you opposed to their proposed goals?

 

[Mach]

Haymarket, you're a teachers uninon proponent, bought, sold, and retired on it. I don't believe anything anyone can communicate to you would change your position, especially considering that gates foundation in particular, believes you're part of the problem (and the solution, but that's too much nuance for you).. I'll respond once to illustrate how trivial your opposition is:

What does this really say? A great teacher is a good thing?

Actually, it's relevant for three reasons.
1. The OP titlte is about how "bad teachers" are a red herring. The admission that good teachers teach well, arguably demonstrates the opposite, that bad teachers are indeed a problem.
2. Admitting there are good teachers, opens the door logically for:
a. identifying the qualities that result in good teaching
b. Training teachers on these qualities that result in better teaching
c. gasp, evaluating that teachers are using that training

So some of the best may indeed be charter schools. And some of the worst are too. The fact that it is a charter school or government school or military school or religious school is NOt the defining characteristic which makes it good or not.

Remeber this:->Haymarket "the designation of Charter to a school is not a defining characterisitic for what makes it good or not"

First, they did not imply it was. Notice that they focus on finding out WHY they perform well, distilling this to what is practical to both train and it's applicability to the wider education system. Which of course, is exactly the opposite of what you claim (that it's being charter that makes the difference). Most scientists are not that dumb, they don't believe that just because test groupA did better, that it's because they are called "test groupA" that they did better. Dur, it simply points them in the right direction to do a deeper dive on groupA, and find out why.

And then you go on to write->

For good reason because of spotty results [of charter schools]. The jury is still out. .

Now, remember what you wrote above.
1. Being a charter school is not a defining characteristic with regards to what makes a school good or not.
2. The jury is out on whether or not being a charter school is good or not

That's a contradiction. Why would you be waiting on that jury verdict, when you already stated you know the verdict? Ouch. You want the jury to be out, just like Sangha showing that averages don't show they better. What subject did you teach? I want to relate this in terms you may understand.

I find it interesting that in a nation founded on capitalist principles where there is a price tag attached to everything and the slogan “you get what you pay for” suddenly goes out the window when it comes to education. If Gates truly believes this and can prove it is true, he should inform the rest of the wealthy class in America who has no problem paying four, five and six times the per pupil funding for the local public school. Obviously they indeed feel strongly that there is a result for money. Second, perhaps the amount of money it would take to close that achievement gap has not yet been put into action?

Hahaha. So you disagree based on what??!? I know money is the most important driver for the unions you so dearly love, and for liberals in general to get more of via taxation. It's just funny to see you spell it out this way.

Excuse me but I just read four areas of improvement they achieved in smaller schools.

They. Claimed. There. Were. Some. Improvements.
Nothing significant in the broader analaysis though. Also, recall that it's a combination of pros and cons. Some things may improve, but some things may get worse (cost, for example). Pointing out an improvement isolated means nothing in that context. I may evaluate Ford sedans vs Toyota Sedans and discover that Ford has more leg-room. Does that in your mind, mean that Fords are better cars as a general statement?

But the reality is that to compare the two systems is comparing apples and cinder blocks in may ways.

Luckily not all progressives with regards to education, consider analyzing schools to be apples to cinder blocks. I don't think they believe its' Costco either, or any quote from De Niro.

Gates foundation has approached this more scientifically than you imply. They have been quite vocal about describing what does not work, as well. I see no evidence they are so dumb as to compare surface level characteristics and to draw conclusions from them without finding root cause. Of course, education reform is what you oppose, and making IT into the bogeyman, is the agenda...right?

 

[Mach]

Look at the factors at what makes your schools suck.

I agree with a lot of that. I would add however that you also :
And look at the factors that make your schools shine.

Then:
Determine whether nor not these are local phenomenon, red herrings, hard to repliate
vs
easy to replicate, not local but applicable to anyone, etc.

This IS obvious stuff. The important distinction though is that public institutions can often, accompanied in this case by powerful public unions, stifle such very normal and routine "improvement feedback cycles".

 

[Mach]

Yet both those groups play a role in education. An important role. More important than schools or teachers.

You're not accepting it, I find that disappointing. You cannot force the dead beat dad to return home. You cannot force the mother to stop drinking and suddenly become a top-notch educator at home.
The single largest alternative to getting such children education occurs in the school system.

Because they paly a role. A student is not an empty vessel. A student brings with him or her all the problems, desires, anger, and problems they have. Each is different. Parents can help or hinder. And many hinder. They play a role. You cannot escape that.

You are trying to escape that!!! Are you claiming there are not different ways to teach a child who has issues, vs a child that is gifted? If you think there ARE different ways, then you admit your point above is largely IRRELEVANT. If you claim there is no difference, then you're joking.

Biggest factor IN THE CLASSROOM. Don't forget that little notation.

We're talking about public education reform, did you forget that notation? Yes, we should eliminate all dead-beat dads. That has nothing to do with teacher performance, and methods.

Of course they do. But that is not what is at dispute. The dispute is in 1) the claim there are a lot of bad teachers and 2) that teachers are responsible for all outcomes. Neither claim is true.

Oh no Boo, please say you don't mean this.
I have to tell you, in any significantly large industry, there are many bad workers. In any reasonable bell shaped curve, you can't refute that. It's just common sense too.
And no one claimed teachers are responsible for all outcomes (strawman).

You are throwing up absurdity, after strawman, in opposition to education improvement. That's the opposite of progressiveness, what's going on?

 

[MaggieD]

The fact is that when inner-city kids are failing one after another, the whole model for these kids is wrong. Hell, teachers can't even teach Lamar to say "ask," which is probably why there's so much violence....they go around axing everybody. It's all about motivation. It's about role models. It's about giving these kids hope. Can teachers do that? Not the way they're currently teaching, that's pretty much a given.


When's the last time you heard of a college class for teachers that taught them how to motivate inner-city kids?

 

[Boo Radley]

The fact is that when inner-city kids are failing one after another, the whole model for these kids is wrong. Hell, teachers can't even teach Lamar to say "ask," which is probably why there's so much violence....they go around axing everybody. It's all about motivation. It's about role models. It's about giving these kids hope. Can teachers do that? Not the way they're currently teaching, that's pretty much a given.


When's the last time you heard of a college class for teachers that taught them how to motivate inner-city kids?

Is that the teachers fault or the cmmunities fault. As one student once said to me, "How can I be wrong when everyone I live with in my community speaks this way?"

Students, unlike shoes or widgets, can actually refuse.

 

[blackjack50]

The fact is that when inner-city kids are failing one after another, the whole model for these kids is wrong. Hell, teachers can't even teach Lamar to say "ask," which is probably why there's so much violence....they go around axing everybody. It's all about motivation. It's about role models. It's about giving these kids hope. Can teachers do that? Not the way they're currently teaching, that's pretty much a given.


When's the last time you heard of a college class for teachers that taught them how to motivate inner-city kids?

We talk about it all the time. Problem is how do you get role models for kids into teaching when they are all white and all female? I mean I can probably find a job out of college teaching based simply on the fact that I am a male. Looking at my classes there are VERY few men like me that plan on teaching. I mean that on the grounds that I am into athletics, I hunt, I fish, I do different martial arts, and so on and so forth. Things that are readily identifiable as "masculine" go a lot farther for some inner city males. Yes I know inner city females are at risk too...but the biggest at risk group is male students.

Of course...does the government have the authority to teach kids how to act? Remember that this is a huge discussion in culturual influences of education and can sometimes appear as a "white man's burden" type of role.

 

[Boo Radley]

You're not accepting it, I find that disappointing. You cannot force the dead beat dad to return home. You cannot force the mother to stop drinking and suddenly become a top-notch educator at home.
The single largest alternative to getting such children education occurs in the school system.

Whether you can force any of it or not, it doesn't mean they don't play a role. But even within the school system, not everyone agrees teachers are the number one factor:
In an interview from his Berkeley office, Rothstein elaborated:

“There is no evidence that even within schools that teachers are the most important factor. The quality of principals, the extent of teacher collaboration, the quality of the curriculum are arguably all more important than variations in teacher quality.”

Gates' education critique flawed, says visiting Berkeley scholar | California Watch

You are trying to escape that!!! Are you claiming there are not different ways to teach a child who has issues, vs a child that is gifted? If you think there ARE different ways, then you admit your point above is largely IRRELEVANT. If you claim there is no difference, then you're joking.

Different ways? Sure. But you are mistaken if you think it is that simple. Some can not be reached because they refuse to be reached. I know. I was one. You fool yourself to think every battle can be won or will be won. In some places it is even foolish to think most can be. Students are not empty and completely compliant. They resist, think for themselves, refuse, don't cooporate, and defy efforts.

We're talking about public education reform, did you forget that notation? Yes, we should eliminate all dead-beat dads. That has nothing to do with teacher performance, and methods.

Not at all. But, that limits it, even if true (which isn't a certainty). Meaning there are still other factors that likely mean more, beyond the control of the teacher.

Oh no Boo, please say you don't mean this.
I have to tell you, in any significantly large industry, there are many bad workers. In any reasonable bell shaped curve, you can't refute that. It's just common sense too.
And no one claimed teachers are responsible for all outcomes (strawman).

You are throwing up absurdity, after strawman, in opposition to education improvement. That's the opposite of progressiveness, what's going on?

No strawman. The claim is that by testing students, you can judge the teacher. This means the teacher is responsible for the outcome and not the student. is there a cuvre? Sure. And teachers are no worse than anywhere else. Maybe better by all accounts. But by and large they are doing the job. Doing what is reasonable to expect. There are not a lot of bad teachers. And students play a role in their own success or failure, as do parents and the community.

 

[MaggieD]

Is that the teachers fault or the communities fault?

Fault, where the community is concerned, isn't the right word. Parents aren't "at fault" because they know no better. They're a product of their "schooling" as well. As for the teachers, fault's not the right word there either. It's the whole model that's wrong. Definition of insanity? Keep doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Change!

Problem is how do you get role models for kids into teaching when they are all white and all female? I mean I can probably find a job out of college teaching based simply on the fact that I am a male. Looking at my classes there are VERY few men like me that plan on teaching.

Then bring the role models to the school. I'm going to focus on blacks here, without prejudice. Are there no successful black businessmen and women? Are there no personal success stories? Of course there are! Monthly assemblies. Get some of them involved in personal coaching. Ask them to "give back." Look at Judge Greg Mathis. Talk about a role model. He's one of countless others. Find them. Get them involved!

Notice I'm leaving the teachers out of the loop. Teachers alone can't do it. But they can clamor for the change that'll work.


And, as I said earlier, let's look at ways to motivate these kids to want to learn. I don't care if they get a pair of Air Jordans for a B. Find a way.

 

[Mach]

Is that the teachers fault or the cmmunities fault. As one student once said to me, "How can I be wrong when everyone I live with in my community speaks this way?" Students, unlike shoes or widgets, can actually refuse.

With that can't-do attitude, I don't know how you get out of the bed in the morning.

 

[Mach]

Of course...does the government have the authority to teach kids how to act? .

If the school is voluntary, and it's in the classroom, yes. If behavior is a pre-req to learning, yes.
If discipline is required for learning and contributing to society, then yes.

 

[sangha]

That's incorrect. I don't see that Gates Foundation in what I posted, claimed that:
- The national average of a charter school is better than the national average of public schools

What I quoted from Gates has to do with the studies they funded and analyzed. It's similar to an experimiental drug evaluation.
You go in with variables and control and you see what worked best. In the schools they worked with, charters performed the best. Their conclusion, find out what makes these charters a success, and:
1. Analyze and understand why
2. If feasible, promote wider distribution of such practice

Are you claiming also that this would then be a bad:
1. conclusion
2. goal for education
??

Furthermore, you seem puzzled at why Gates Foundation focused on the schools in their study. What do you think they were doing...setting up testing and funding and evaluation of say, 50 schools, and then ignoring those schools in their analysis?!?

Let's see what's on their foundation site regarding charters, just for completeness:
Charter Schools and Networks | Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Goal #1: Increase the number of students served by high-performing charters by:
Goal #2: Enhance the degree to which successful charter schools influence the broader system by:

Of course, their goals are very specific when it comes to charters, they correctly focus only on the high performing ones. Are you opposed to their proposed goals?

Your post is completely dishonest. It is filled with straw men.

For one thing, I didn't quote anything from your post or the Gates report, so your claim (implied in your first paragraph) that I said anything about the Gates conclusions is a fiction. You then go on with a transparent attempt to misportray me as thinking it would be "bad" to try to find better ways to educate children. You then dishonestly claim that I seem "puzzled" about why Gates limited their study when all I did was point out that it was limited and therefore inferior to the more comprehensive study I linked to. And then you conclude with a dishonest attempt to imply that I oppose their goals when all I did was post info and links to a more comprehensive study.

You failed completely. You failed to address the substance of my post, you failed to refute anything in the study I linked to, and you failed to misportray me as having bad intent.

 

[sangha]

Haymarket, you're a teachers uninon proponent, bought, sold, and retired on it. I don't believe anything anyone can communicate to you would change your position, especially considering that gates foundation in particular, believes you're part of the problem (and the solution, but that's too much nuance for you).. I'll respond once to illustrate how trivial your opposition is:

I see that I'm not the only one you're using ad homs against

That's a contradiction. Why would you be waiting on that jury verdict, when you already stated you know the verdict? Ouch. You want the jury to be out, just like Sangha showing that averages don't show they better. What subject did you teach? I want to relate this in terms you may understand.

It is dishonest to misportray what the study I linked to said. It did much more than state the average performance for all charter schools and compare them to the avg of all public schools. If you read the report, as an intellectually honest discussion would require that, you'd know how wrong you are.

I'll repeat - The CREDO Report does not compare averages

Gates foundation has approached this more scientifically than you imply. They have been quite vocal about describing what does not work, as well. I see no evidence they are so dumb as to compare surface level characteristics and to draw conclusions from them without finding root cause. Of course, education reform is what you oppose, and making IT into the bogeyman, is the agenda...right?

The Gates Foundation used a very limited sample and that is not scientific. Neither are your ad homs about Haymarkets intentions

 

[sangha]

With that can't-do attitude, I don't know how you get out of the bed in the morning.

Another ad-hom

 

[Mach]

Gates' education critique flawed, says visiting Berkeley scholar | California Watch

Right. So good teachers don't collaborate, or push for curriculum reform, etc.?
I don't disagree that many educators have a beef with Gates Foundation.
Nor do I think Gates Foundation is the end-all-be-all. You'd think their goal being to find out what works and why, and provide that information, would be welcomed. Too funny.

Different ways? Sure. But you are mistaken if you think it is that simple. Some can not be reached because they refuse to be reached. I know. I was one. You fool yourself to think every battle can be won or will be won. In some places it is even foolish to think most can be. Students are not empty and completely compliant. They resist, think for themselves, refuse, don't cooporate, and defy efforts.

Control groups have kids that also won't learn, it's irrelevant.

Not at all. But, that limits it, even if true (which isn't a certainty). Meaning there are still other factors that likely mean more, beyond the control of the teacher.

Are you saying we should spend that money on cultural reform instead? Please elaborate.

No strawman. The claim is that by testing students, you can judge the teacher. This means the teacher is responsible for the outcome and not the student. is there a cuvre? Sure. And teachers are no worse than anywhere else. Maybe better by all accounts. But by and large they are doing the job. Doing what is reasonable to expect. There are not a lot of bad teachers. And students play a role in their own success or failure, as do parents and the community.

Before I can answer that, I must ask. What precisely do teachers measure themselves by, if not their student performance? The size of their pension?

 

[Mach]

Your post is completely dishonest. It is filled with straw men.
For one thing,

By all means, simply post the a relatively recent claim from gates foundation, that is contradicted by a quote from your link.

came up with results that contradict the limited Gates study about charter schools

If you re-read the link to the Gates reports, you'll see that they limited the types of charter schools they looked at. Hmmmm

Then please, explain why you believe Gates reports about schools they were involved in, is odd. What were you expecting them to do, investigate schools that were: Please elaborate.

 

[haymarket]

from Mach

Haymarket, you're a teachers uninon proponent, bought, sold, and retired on it. I don't believe anything anyone can communicate to you would change your position, especially considering that gates foundation in particular, believes you're part of the problem (and the solution, but that's too much nuance for you)..

Most excellent. So go and spout off at the mouth about professional basketball and just make sure to disqualify anybody who actually played the game who might contradict your perceptions that you got from reading magazines and watching it on TV.

Go and engage in pompous pontification about the American automobile industry but make sure than anyone who actually aspent their professional career in that industry comes nowhere near your discussion and pollutes it with actual experience and inside information.

Rant on about the dietary problems of the average American while sitting in your easy chair consuming 4,000 calories a day and make sure nobody with a degree in the actual subject or who has spent their adult life in the treneches dare say a word about it.

It this attitude were not so pervasive among the far right it would be laughable.

I don't need some stupid list of the characteristics of what makes a good teacher versus a bad teacher. Give me one hour with them and I can tell you that. A good baseball scout does not need a computer program to tell you if a kid can hit or not.

As for charter schools ---- get this straight ...... and I know this is hard for you to comprehend because you are on a crusade and have a cause celebre to champion.............. When you talk about education in America - there is not such thing as The Public School System. There is no such thing as The Charter School System.

And if you can figure out what that means, you will know exactly what a good portion of the problem is in this country.

 

[sangha]

By all means, simply post the a relatively recent claim from gates foundation, that is contradicted by a quote from your link.



Then please, explain why you believe Gates reports about schools they were involved in, is odd. What were you expecting them to do, investigate schools that were: Please elaborate.

More straw men and more evidence that you didn't read the report that I linked to

As the report points out, there are many factors which determine the performance of students in a charter school vs students in a public school. Some of the most important factors were the characteristics of the students.

And I never used the word "odd". That is a straw man you are using to avoid the fact that the CREDO study was more comprehensive (and more scientific) than the Gates Foundations study

 

[Boo Radley]

With that can't-do attitude, I don't know how you get out of the bed in the morning.

You misread. I work to improve myself daily, and do do many things.

 

[Boo Radley]

Fault, where the community is concerned, isn't the right word. Parents aren't "at fault" because they know no better. They're a product of their "schooling" as well. As for the teachers, fault's not the right word there either. It's the whole model that's wrong. Definition of insanity? Keep doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Change!

Model? That's intersting. I would love to hear more.

Then bring the role models to the school. I'm going to focus on blacks here, without prejudice. Are there no successful black businessmen and women? Are there no personal success stories? Of course there are! Monthly assemblies. Get some of them involved in personal coaching. Ask them to "give back." Look at Judge Greg Mathis. Talk about a role model. He's one of countless others. Find them. Get them involved!

Notice I'm leaving the teachers out of the loop. Teachers alone can't do it. But they can clamor for the change that'll work.


And, as I said earlier, let's look at ways to motivate these kids to want to learn. I don't care if they get a pair of Air Jordans for a B. Find a way.

That has been tried, but today few see anyone uotside of parents as friends as role models. One group even went so far as to say they were their own role models and didn't appreciate us trying to change they way they spoke and wrote. It blew my mind. Now, we still keep fighting the good fight. And we do have success, even at the school i Mississippi. But there is a difference between the student there and the student at harvard, and if a teacher is going to be judged by student success, the teacher is better off to only work where there are good students to start with. That's all I'm saying.